ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

January

B,

1976

CITY OF JACKSONVILLE,

)

Petitioner,

v.

)

PCB’

75—390

)

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,

)

Respondent.

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD

(by Mr. Goodman):

This matter comes before the Pollution Control Board

(Board)

upon the September 24,

1975, Motion of the City of

Jacksonville

(Jacksonville)

to amend the Board Orders in

EPA v

City of Jacksonville, PCB

71—355.

More particularly,

Jacksonville seeks

to be relieved of the burden of either

relocating Mauvaise Terre Creek or removing remaining lime

sludge deposits as per the Board’s Order of May 23,

1972,. as

amended June 20,

1972,

and.March 8, 1973.

On October

9,

1975,

this motion was construed by the Board as

a Petition

for Variance.

An Environmental Protection Agency

(Agency)

Recommendation was received

on

December

15,

1975.

The

Petition also seeks

to have the time

for placing the sludge

disposal site in operation extended until October

1,

1977,

and

to have the Petitioner’s Bond rescinded and returned.

At the time of the Board Order of March

8,

1973,

PCB 71-355, it was the understanding of the parties and the

Board that relocation of the stream would be the most

economical method’of cleaning the stream and would have

environmental advantages, PCB 71—355 at 4.

(March

8,

1973)

However,

it has become apparent that the situation has

changed in the last two years.

Lime sludge is no longer

discharged into the Creek from the Jacksonville Water

Treatment Plant.

The lime sludge deposits are now concentrated

in an area just down stream from the old sludge outfall

pipe,

although the sludge still exists intermittently all

along the Creek bank

(Pet.

Ex.

A,

2—3).

The total lime

sludge deposits in the area consist of approximately 93

cubic yards

(Pet.

Ex. A at 3).

According to a study performed by Dr. Loren D. Moehn(Pet.

Ex.

B), the pH of 7—8 was within acceptable parameters,

as

was the total alkalinity

(mean 158.3 ppm).

In addition

there is an abundance of dissolved oxygen

(average 13.9 ppm)

as well as a healthy concentration of CO2

(trace).

Green

algae was present and the study

found, based upon simple

sampling techniques,

five different fish families and ten

different fish species including

a blackside darter, which

is very intolerant to water pollution.

19

~-

805

---

(2)

The conclusion of two studies,

in which

the Agency

concurs,

is that relocation of the stream would have

a

potentially more harmful effect than the lime •~ludge. Nor

would removal of the remaining sludge deposits’ serve any

useful purpose as the Creek has shown a propensity to clean

itself and the cost of reihoval would be prohibitive.

The

Agency states that the removal of sludge would “necessitate

loss of timber along the Creek, damage open fields, and

possibly cause erosion

....

Thus more environmental harm

could occur with relocating and clearing the Creek”

(Rec.

6)

The Agency states

that. it has no objection to an

October

1,

1977 operating date for the new sludge disposal

site which has already received preliminary Agency approval

as long as no sludge enters the stream and all appropriate

permits are obtained.

Further, the Agency confirms that Petitioner has

complied with paragraphs

1 and

2 of the Board’s Order of

May

23,

1972, as amended June 20,

1972,

and that the bond

should be returned.

Petitioner has completed construction

of its lime sludge beds,

including the recycling of the

effluent of its water treatment plant and has purchased a

site for future disposal of the lime sludge.

The Board finds that Jacksonville has substantially

completed the requirements of the Board Order in PCB 71—355

and that the purpose for the posting of the performance bond

therein, has been achieved.

The date for placing the disposal

site in operation shall be extended to October

1,

1977, and

a variance from the requirement of relocating the Creek will

be granted.

rtiith respect to the sludge deposits, however,

the Board

finds that the mere allegation of prohibitive costs and

environmental harm involved with their removal is not

persuasive, especially considering the potential harm to

children playing in the creek.

Therefore the Board will

retain jurisdiction of this proceeding for the purpose of

entertaining briefs on the issue of cost of removal of the

sludge deposits in the stream bed and the environmental harm

therefrom,

and whether or not the Board has authority to order

clean up of wastes to protect the public from harm not associated

with the environmental aspect of that waste.

(See Agency

recommendation,

¶12, page 6.)

This Opinion constitutes the Board’s findings of fact

and conclusions of law in this matter.

19—

606

---

(3)

ORDER

It-.

is the Order of

the Pollution Control ~oard that:

a)

Petitioner, City of Jdcksonvil1e,

be and hereby

is

yranted variance from that part

of the Board’s Order

in

PCI3 71-355 of May

23,

1972,

as amended June

20,

1972, which

required relocation of Mauvaise Terre Creek;

and

b)

Petitioner shall place its new

lirile

sludge disposal

site in operation on or before October

1,

1977 provided that

no

lime sludge be permitted to

enter Mauvaise Terre Creek

and all appropriate Agency permits shall be obtained in a

timely manner;

and

c)

The Bond of

$10,

000 furnished by Petitioner in

P03 71-355 be and hereby

is rescinded and is ordered returned

to Petitioner;

and

d)

The parties will study

the sludge deposit situation

with respect to the following questions and present briefs

to the Board by June

1,

1976:

1)

The cost of removal

of the deposits.

2)

The environmental harm that may be done by

such removal.

3)

Whether the Board has authority

to require

removal of wastes

to protect the public from harm

not associated with the environmental aspect of

that waste.

e)

The Board retains jurisdication in this matter for

the purpose aforesaid.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Mr.

Zeitlin Concurs

in the Opinion.

Mr. Young abstains.

I,

Christan L.

Moffett, Clerk of the Illinois Pollution

Control Board,

hereby c~çtifythe above Opinion and Order

were adopted on the

_______________

day of

______________

1975 by

a vote of

~-g

—____________

OA4m,14ht~

Christan L. Mo~fet~/~1erk

Illinois Pollution/~trol Board